The fact that there is an uproar shows that it has NOT happened. NBC journalists are allowed to voice dissent without being shown the door. That would not happen in Hungary. And in this case, I don't blame you. Hiring someone who had previously lied repeatedly to the media and the public is not someone I would want to work with.
As I've said many times, I don't watch the entertainment channels on cable news very often. I prefer to get my news from more reliable print sources. And there is life to be lived.
When I do a search using the words "Biden DOJ targeting parents" nearly everything that comes up is either from "Gym Jordan" a coach who ignored rampant sexual abuse, or from the various Republican attorneys general like sleazebag Ken Paxton who rarely miss a chance to grandstand and make accusations against the party in power. Probably need to check your sources. Try checking the AP or BBC instead of Breitbart, Infowars or Truth Social.
The whistle blower complaint is two years old and I have not see further substantive coverage of the accusation. There was a fact check that included this:
On Oct. 4, five days after receiving the NSBA letter, Garland issued a memo citing “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools. While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.”
Garland directed “the Federal Bureau of Investigation, working with each United States Attorney, to convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days … [to] facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response
The House Oversight Committee has not had a great track record with accuracy so far, especially since its most recent whistleblower was arrested for lying.
It is a good point. The media diet you choose will often influence which stories are played prominently. It's why I still choose print media as the most accurate. It's where I worked for 40 years so that should surprise no one.
You would have to give me specific examples of these cases since I am not familiar with any of them. There is a long history of government entities abusing power, but what my columns is about is on corporate level that would be a mass take over of the media.
It appears what you are referring to is when school officials are being threatened because they won't ban books. Threats against any elected official should be met with an investigation if the threat is deeded credible.
That's because I don't see anything nefarious about this. Garland denied the charges. if the DOJ was targeting individuals for threatening school officials, well, that seems like just cause to me.
Will your news blog, “The Front Page” be eligible for state funds? Is this news site providing an alternate to The Post-Star and stealing readers from The Post-Star? In other words, are you part of the problem?
I consider The Front Page to be a valued well-researched information resource, in addition to both my paper delivery and online subscription to the Post Star, along with the Vermont Digger online newsletter, and intermittent paper copies of the Albany Times Union, USA Today and occasional NY Times.
To imply that The Front Page forum is “stealing” from the Post Star is insulting, but it seems that was your intent. The only single-source news readers I know are FOX-Toxic TV addicts.
Both Will Doolittle and myself spent decades with the mission of serving our community at our newspaper. That is what drove us. Since retirement, that mission continues. We hope The Front Page fills in some of the gaps that is missing in local coverage throughout the region. I have repeatedly endorsed supporting all local newspapers on The Front Page and while talking to community groups. Their journalism is essential. We do not see our newsletter as an alternative to The Post-Star at all, but perhaps an extension of the work that we used to do there. Hopefully, that is serving the community. Since the vast majority of our readers get the newsletter for free, I don't see how we are part of the problem. And finally, no we have no interest in gaining any state funds.
Thanks. Regardless, I know I read your newsletter. There’s only so much time in the day for news consumption 15 minutes on your news site is 15 minutes less time elsewhere. None of this is meant to be a criticism. What I’m saying is technology is changing. I am opposed to government funded media. It does not seem to work well across the rest of the world.
I subscribe to the Post-Star online. Lets me get at specific articles, and send links around. But, in point of fact, I turn to online newsletters first, in the morning, because they are the most consistent, trustworthy source.
Thank goodness I'm retired. I guess if I had a daily commute I might listen to a podcast or two. Otherwise, reading is faster and more efficient (I get to mull over a surprise statement, in context, maybe re-reading a section, without having the audio drag me off that puzzling point and on to the next one.
It's a NYS tax break for local newspapers. Just easing the tax burden a bit. I don't think those newspapers would give up editorial control to any state agency.
And, if I want independent, truth-telling news, I prefer NPR and PBS to any news source owned by, say, the Sinclair Broadcast Group.
See:
"Baltimore Sun's purchase last month by television magnate David D. Smith has sparked outrage and bafflement.
Outrage among some Baltimore residents and journalists who have seen Smith steer the nearly 200 local television stations owned or controlled by his company, Sinclair Broadcast Group, hard to the right politically. And bafflement over why he wanted the famous but famished newspaper in the first place."
I would hope not. I enjoy The Front Page. But's opinion, analysis and commentary, not journalism. It has value, but it's not journalism. There's no shortage of opinion in our society. It's journalism that's so badly lacking that it needs public policy support.
It's right to be concerned. But it can be done with proper guardrails. Most countries - including nearly all democratic (lowercase d) ones - have public media.
Find it interesting, that a discussion on taxpayer supported media immediate evolves into a partisan food fight. Maybe rightly so. Control of the media is sought after by both sides.
One local editor remarked how his paper will publish most things, even harmful lies, believing that the readers are responsible for making their own decisions. But the ability of readers to intelligently decide is impaired when their sources of information are purveyors of untruths and fear mongering, when their teachers are gagged and their books are banned, and when their churchs are founts of meanness and hypocracy. Freedom of press exists for the discovery and disclosure of lies and corruption, particularly in government. Free an unintimidated investigative reporters are its soldiers and guardians. We do not have investigative reporters in the North Country. We have Elise Stephanik, an Orban wannabe.
Chilling, if excellent column. Madeleine Albright wrote a little book called Fascism, A Warning. She outlines the game plan for making a democracy disappear and replacing it with authoritarianism and dictatorship. It's always the same ...... first, you commandeer the press. Right on, Ken!
You see and capture the history of the "loss of a free press" very well. Hungary's Orban''s Hungary began as a democracy...it was gradual, this takeover. And the media (and big money) was a big part--because propaganda plays a big part in influencing what we think we think, or know, or believe. Thousands of our local newspapers have been taken over by conglomerates, recently the Baltimore Sun.-Jim Hightower writes about that incredible loss, over 2000 local newspapers lost. . The one who wants power declaring free press flawed, free elections rigged...One can hear the repeated script on Fox and other right wing media--the same line about the increase in crime (when it has actually decreased), the terrible economy (when it is very resilient, lower unemployment, wages rising). In high education the law passed in different states forbidding programs of diversity and inclusion and have forbidden the teaching of "critical race theory" which, is really American History. Some states in the past have actually forbidden mentioning the climate crisis--and financial institutions have been forbidden to include "green energy" as part of their platform of investment strategy....) It is obvious that if we can't learn, know, hear..we are ignorant. And created fears creates more fear, and hatred. Hitler's Goebbels, the Nazi propagandist showed the power of the repeated lie that is experienced as true...If you repeat something enough people believe. He said you could make someone believe that a circle is really a square. I believe that when I hear what Stefanik and other Maga say. Maga have clearly understood that...look at what Stefanik, Mace...and others say, they .have learned from Organ and Putin and Hitler the Fascist script...and newspapers/the media play a central role. Thank you for tracing the danger...because clearly it could happen here...and is...
Which lists 14 characteristics of fascist regimes:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scape-goats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and0 disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.4. The supremacy of the military/ avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
A great piece! I would want this piece reprinted at least once a week til Hell freezes over. This more accurately describes the erosion in our country more than anything else. Kudos!
This alarming article (You can't. even imagine...)and this area to post provides your readers with a common comment space as we each consider how to organize for the preservation of our democracy in light of the high stakes of the Nov. 2024 election and what specific actions to Get Out the Vote (GOTV) can be taken ... be it to write letters and postcards to voters in swing states as early as April, phone or text banking , donating.. Useful venues for participating include Vote Forward, Gaslitnationpod and Indivisible.
I'm all for GOTV efforts, as well as a supporter of VoteRiders.org.
Some people need "voter ID" just to access health services, so helping them work through the paperwork to get voter ID goes beyond helping them vote. It includes them in society. It shows them that some people work to help others -- not necessarily those in the same tribe.
OMG the bottom line to me, whether Liberal or Conservative, is that BOTH deserve to be heard and respected as much as possible, sooo when you take one away YOU ARE WRONG - in my book of Fair Play in any arena. Both sides deserve to be heard and respected as much as humanly possible. Taking one away is not the way to do anything, in politics, religion or any respected arena, so if you do it you will not merit any respect from me. Carl Ross.
Perhaps Cambridge should listen to the students and get on with more important things. This whole thing has been a ridiculous waste of time and energy.
The fact that there is an uproar shows that it has NOT happened. NBC journalists are allowed to voice dissent without being shown the door. That would not happen in Hungary. And in this case, I don't blame you. Hiring someone who had previously lied repeatedly to the media and the public is not someone I would want to work with.
I don't know who two of the three people are. But Hallie Jackson was just promoted to weekend anchor at NBC.
As I've said many times, I don't watch the entertainment channels on cable news very often. I prefer to get my news from more reliable print sources. And there is life to be lived.
You’re steeped in it, you need to get out of your information silo and dry off.
She's an election denier. Who would want her reporting for them ? She's a proven liar
When I do a search using the words "Biden DOJ targeting parents" nearly everything that comes up is either from "Gym Jordan" a coach who ignored rampant sexual abuse, or from the various Republican attorneys general like sleazebag Ken Paxton who rarely miss a chance to grandstand and make accusations against the party in power. Probably need to check your sources. Try checking the AP or BBC instead of Breitbart, Infowars or Truth Social.
Jim Jordan should be in jail for contempt of congress, not chairing the house judiciary committee.
The whistle blower complaint is two years old and I have not see further substantive coverage of the accusation. There was a fact check that included this:
On Oct. 4, five days after receiving the NSBA letter, Garland issued a memo citing “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools. While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.”
Garland directed “the Federal Bureau of Investigation, working with each United States Attorney, to convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days … [to] facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response
The House Oversight Committee has not had a great track record with accuracy so far, especially since its most recent whistleblower was arrested for lying.
It is a good point. The media diet you choose will often influence which stories are played prominently. It's why I still choose print media as the most accurate. It's where I worked for 40 years so that should surprise no one.
I respect the vast majority of print reporters and editors so if you read a newspaper I would respect that.
You would have to give me specific examples of these cases since I am not familiar with any of them. There is a long history of government entities abusing power, but what my columns is about is on corporate level that would be a mass take over of the media.
It appears what you are referring to is when school officials are being threatened because they won't ban books. Threats against any elected official should be met with an investigation if the threat is deeded credible.
That's because I don't see anything nefarious about this. Garland denied the charges. if the DOJ was targeting individuals for threatening school officials, well, that seems like just cause to me.
Will your news blog, “The Front Page” be eligible for state funds? Is this news site providing an alternate to The Post-Star and stealing readers from The Post-Star? In other words, are you part of the problem?
I consider The Front Page to be a valued well-researched information resource, in addition to both my paper delivery and online subscription to the Post Star, along with the Vermont Digger online newsletter, and intermittent paper copies of the Albany Times Union, USA Today and occasional NY Times.
To imply that The Front Page forum is “stealing” from the Post Star is insulting, but it seems that was your intent. The only single-source news readers I know are FOX-Toxic TV addicts.
Both Will Doolittle and myself spent decades with the mission of serving our community at our newspaper. That is what drove us. Since retirement, that mission continues. We hope The Front Page fills in some of the gaps that is missing in local coverage throughout the region. I have repeatedly endorsed supporting all local newspapers on The Front Page and while talking to community groups. Their journalism is essential. We do not see our newsletter as an alternative to The Post-Star at all, but perhaps an extension of the work that we used to do there. Hopefully, that is serving the community. Since the vast majority of our readers get the newsletter for free, I don't see how we are part of the problem. And finally, no we have no interest in gaining any state funds.
Thanks. Regardless, I know I read your newsletter. There’s only so much time in the day for news consumption 15 minutes on your news site is 15 minutes less time elsewhere. None of this is meant to be a criticism. What I’m saying is technology is changing. I am opposed to government funded media. It does not seem to work well across the rest of the world.
There is certainly a concern among journalists as well, but without newspapers to hold public officials accountable, I fear things will be far worse.
I subscribe to the Post-Star online. Lets me get at specific articles, and send links around. But, in point of fact, I turn to online newsletters first, in the morning, because they are the most consistent, trustworthy source.
Thank goodness I'm retired. I guess if I had a daily commute I might listen to a podcast or two. Otherwise, reading is faster and more efficient (I get to mull over a surprise statement, in context, maybe re-reading a section, without having the audio drag me off that puzzling point and on to the next one.
It's not quite "government-funded media."
It's a NYS tax break for local newspapers. Just easing the tax burden a bit. I don't think those newspapers would give up editorial control to any state agency.
And, if I want independent, truth-telling news, I prefer NPR and PBS to any news source owned by, say, the Sinclair Broadcast Group.
See:
"Baltimore Sun's purchase last month by television magnate David D. Smith has sparked outrage and bafflement.
Outrage among some Baltimore residents and journalists who have seen Smith steer the nearly 200 local television stations owned or controlled by his company, Sinclair Broadcast Group, hard to the right politically. And bafflement over why he wanted the famous but famished newspaper in the first place."
https://www.npr.org/2024/02/26/1233856063/baltimore-sun-new-owner-david-smith-sinclair
The Baltimore Sun purchase and the requirements to air slanted content by Singleton television stations is certainly more frightening.
I would hope not. I enjoy The Front Page. But's opinion, analysis and commentary, not journalism. It has value, but it's not journalism. There's no shortage of opinion in our society. It's journalism that's so badly lacking that it needs public policy support.
I’m concerned about government funded media
It's right to be concerned. But it can be done with proper guardrails. Most countries - including nearly all democratic (lowercase d) ones - have public media.
No Dave, but thinking like your’s is.
Find it interesting, that a discussion on taxpayer supported media immediate evolves into a partisan food fight. Maybe rightly so. Control of the media is sought after by both sides.
I think you are absolutely right Ken.
One local editor remarked how his paper will publish most things, even harmful lies, believing that the readers are responsible for making their own decisions. But the ability of readers to intelligently decide is impaired when their sources of information are purveyors of untruths and fear mongering, when their teachers are gagged and their books are banned, and when their churchs are founts of meanness and hypocracy. Freedom of press exists for the discovery and disclosure of lies and corruption, particularly in government. Free an unintimidated investigative reporters are its soldiers and guardians. We do not have investigative reporters in the North Country. We have Elise Stephanik, an Orban wannabe.
You are right, of course, Ken. I only hope that the advent of the Internet will level the playing field. I know. Wishful thinking.
Unfortunately, the level of disinformation makes that a muddy landscape.
Chilling, if excellent column. Madeleine Albright wrote a little book called Fascism, A Warning. She outlines the game plan for making a democracy disappear and replacing it with authoritarianism and dictatorship. It's always the same ...... first, you commandeer the press. Right on, Ken!
You see and capture the history of the "loss of a free press" very well. Hungary's Orban''s Hungary began as a democracy...it was gradual, this takeover. And the media (and big money) was a big part--because propaganda plays a big part in influencing what we think we think, or know, or believe. Thousands of our local newspapers have been taken over by conglomerates, recently the Baltimore Sun.-Jim Hightower writes about that incredible loss, over 2000 local newspapers lost. . The one who wants power declaring free press flawed, free elections rigged...One can hear the repeated script on Fox and other right wing media--the same line about the increase in crime (when it has actually decreased), the terrible economy (when it is very resilient, lower unemployment, wages rising). In high education the law passed in different states forbidding programs of diversity and inclusion and have forbidden the teaching of "critical race theory" which, is really American History. Some states in the past have actually forbidden mentioning the climate crisis--and financial institutions have been forbidden to include "green energy" as part of their platform of investment strategy....) It is obvious that if we can't learn, know, hear..we are ignorant. And created fears creates more fear, and hatred. Hitler's Goebbels, the Nazi propagandist showed the power of the repeated lie that is experienced as true...If you repeat something enough people believe. He said you could make someone believe that a circle is really a square. I believe that when I hear what Stefanik and other Maga say. Maga have clearly understood that...look at what Stefanik, Mace...and others say, they .have learned from Organ and Putin and Hitler the Fascist script...and newspapers/the media play a central role. Thank you for tracing the danger...because clearly it could happen here...and is...
good!
One of the signs of fascism.
See "Fascism Anyone?" by Lawrence Britt, originally published here:
https://secularhumanism.org/2003/03/fascism-anyone/
Which lists 14 characteristics of fascist regimes:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scape-goats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and0 disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.4. The supremacy of the military/ avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
None of these things applies to the Biden Administration.
Many, if not all, of them apply to Trump and the MAGA Republicans.
A great piece! I would want this piece reprinted at least once a week til Hell freezes over. This more accurately describes the erosion in our country more than anything else. Kudos!
Stefanik made the right vote.
But Heather Cox Richardson made a point in her Substack today that describes Stefanik to a “T”:
“Trump Republicans willing to overthrow American democracy so long as it kept them in power”.
Even though Ronna McDaniel also fit the description, she lost her power. Stefanik next?
Cambridge and Common Sense are juxtaposing ideas.
This alarming article (You can't. even imagine...)and this area to post provides your readers with a common comment space as we each consider how to organize for the preservation of our democracy in light of the high stakes of the Nov. 2024 election and what specific actions to Get Out the Vote (GOTV) can be taken ... be it to write letters and postcards to voters in swing states as early as April, phone or text banking , donating.. Useful venues for participating include Vote Forward, Gaslitnationpod and Indivisible.
I'm all for GOTV efforts, as well as a supporter of VoteRiders.org.
Some people need "voter ID" just to access health services, so helping them work through the paperwork to get voter ID goes beyond helping them vote. It includes them in society. It shows them that some people work to help others -- not necessarily those in the same tribe.
OMG the bottom line to me, whether Liberal or Conservative, is that BOTH deserve to be heard and respected as much as possible, sooo when you take one away YOU ARE WRONG - in my book of Fair Play in any arena. Both sides deserve to be heard and respected as much as humanly possible. Taking one away is not the way to do anything, in politics, religion or any respected arena, so if you do it you will not merit any respect from me. Carl Ross.
Perhaps Cambridge should listen to the students and get on with more important things. This whole thing has been a ridiculous waste of time and energy.
Disagree. We lose our democracy in in our school system(s). Stupid (not educated) people are easily dominated.